the blog eclectic

Monday, Sept 16, 2002

Aldrin biffs bozo

Astronaut Buzz Aldrin was in the lobby of the Luxe Hotel, in Beverly Hills, CA,
on Sept 11. He
just finished an interview with a Japanese TV crew (or may have been lured there
under false pretenses). The bozo in question, one Mr Bart Sibrel,
accosted him and asked him to swear on a Bible that he really did walk on the Moon.
Sibrel also told Aldrin that he was a thief because he was taking money for an interview
about something he didn't do.

Sibrel is 37, and hails from Tennessee. Down there they have some sort of old saying about
catching flies more easily with honey than insults, but Mr Sibrel apparently hasn't heard of it.
According to the news report, Sibrel is 6' 2", 250 pounds. Probably not all muscle, though.
Aldrin is 5' 10", 150.

After considering Mr Sibrel's request, Aldrin gave Sibrel a good right hook.

Sibrel evidently makes a hobby of this sort of thing. He's made that same gambit to
as many other astronauts as he can get close to. He's even pulled that one on Aldrin before.

Aldrin is 72 (born January 20, 1930). His mother's maiden name was Marian Moon. His father was
a student of
Robert Goddard. In 1951, Aldrin graduated 3rd in his class at West Point.
He flew Sabre jets in the Korean War.

After that he attended MIT, earning a PhD in astronautics with his thesis,
"Guidance for Manned Orbital Rendezvous." This work became the basis for the techniques
NASA now uses for spacecraft to hook up while in orbit.

On July 20, 1969, he and Neil Armstrong landed on, and walked on, the Moon, in the Apollo
XI flight.

After retiring from NASA, he took command of the Test Pilot School at Edwards
AFB in California, from 1971 until 1972, when he retired from the Air Force.

Evidently Mr Sibrel makes his living trying to convince people that the Moon program
never happened, that it was all an elaborate hoax by NASA to cover up the fact that
they just couldn't do it.

Mr Sibrel is considering suing Aldrin. I hope it goes to court. Can you imagine a jury
deciding against Buzz Aldrin?

The evidence against Sibrel

Some people give Sibrel the benefit of the doubt, saying that he really believes this
nonsense, and is just a man with a cause.

...awards from the American Motion Picture Society includ[ing] Best Cinematography, Best Editing, and two Top Ten awards.

Now look at one of his claims: The photos taken on the Moon didn't show stars in the
dark sky.

That's the clincher. Here's a guy who is an expert videographer, and therefore
understands how light and video - and film - work. He knows full well that stars will
not show up in a fast shutter speed photograph.

The photo of Aldrin or Armstrong in a space suit on the Moon is a photo
of an object in direct sunlight. Any first year photo student will tell you that the standard exposure
for such an object is f/16 at a shutter speed of 1/(ASA of the film).

They were using a special Kodak Ektachrome film, most likely with an ASA of 25,
to get the finest
detail possible. 1/25 second is a little long for a steady hand-held exposure (the cameras
were actually fixed to the space suits), so we
convert that to 3 stops faster, 1/125 (the closest to 1/100 on the camera), and adjust
the aperture accordingly, to f/8.

At 1/125 second, you don't get stars, even in a dark night sky. And Sibrel knows that.
Therefore, it must be Sibrel, not Aldrin, who is (to paraphrase Sibrel)

Is Sibrel a plagiarist?

Sibrel's video is titled A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon.

This site tells of a report from
1997, titled A Funny Thing Happened On Our Way to the Moon, by Ralph Rene,
described as "a brilliant lay physicist".

This site
tells of Bill Kaysing, "head of a technical presentations unit at Rocketdyne's propulsion
fuel laboratory in Los Angeles from 1956 to 1963". Kaysing wrote a book titled
We Never Went To the Moon, America's $30 Billion Swindle

Both these people put forth the same types of argument that Sibrel does.
The difference is that their conclusions are more or less freely available;
Sibrel wants $19.95 for his video.

There seems to be a small, but thriving, cottage industry in the Moon-hoax sector.

More background

The camera was a
Hasselblad, the Rolls-Royce of cameras. One of
those cameras is still up there (they left it behind to save weight for the
take-off). Quite a souvenir, if anybody finds it.

That camera site is the Apollo
Lunar Surface Journal. It's a treasure-chest of history and images from the Apollo
programs (Apollo 11 through 17).

There's at least one site that does a thorough fact-checking of the hoaxer's claims.
If you're interested in the hoaxer's background, in the sorts of things they claim, and
how every one of their misconceptions is turned to dust - Moon-dust - take a long look
at the excellent Moon Base Clavius site.

There are quite a few people besides Sibrel who think it was all a fake. The
Hare Krishnas are another group.
According to their site,

It is now common knowledge throughout the world that the Apollo Moon
landings were faked by NASA back in the 60's, although many gullible people still accept
NASA's claim of landing men on the Moon, without bothering to carry out any research, or
investigation, to see if NASA are indeed telling the truth.

They outdo Simbrel. They don't even bother to resort to science:

By it's own admission Nasa agreed the temperature on the moon to be 200
degrees below zero- *no human body could withstand that temperature even with 1969
technology.

The moon's surface according to Vedic conclusion, common sense, and scientific
reasoning is made of a reflective substance; why then are there shadows in the video?

...we have information from a very reliable source, the Sanskrit Vedic scriptures, that
the astronauts never actually went to the moon. The Vedic account of our planetary
system is already researched, concluded, and perfect. The Vedas state that the moon is
800,000 miles farther from the earth than the sun.
...according to the Vedas, each planet has its particular standard of living and
atmosphere, and no one can transfer from one planet to another without becoming properly
qualified. This means that if someone wants to go to Mars, for instance, he has to give up
his present gross material body and acquire another one suitable for life on that
particular planet.
...they cannot go to the moon planet, which the Vedas describe not as a lifeless desert
but as a heavenly planet of extraordinary material pleasures. Where the astronauts
actually went, or how this fabrication of lunar visitation will one day be exposed to
people in general, are not part of our present discussion. But the Vedic teachings warn us
that the manned moon landing is certainly an empty bluff.

The effects of strongly-held, unquestioned beliefs are strange indeed.

A thousand years from now, when the Moon is a thriving colony and jumping-off point
for Mars and beyond, the Vedas will still say that the Moon is further from the Earth
than the Sun. That's the difference between revealed religion and science. Science
is revised whenever new facts contradict old theories. Religion almost never changes its
holy texts.